Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1785616
 
 

Footnotes (400)



 


 



Emotional Regulation and Judicial Behavior


Terry A. Maroney


Vanderbilt University - Law School

April 26, 2012

California Law Review, Vol. 99, p.1481, 2011
Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 11-16

Abstract:     
Judges are human and experience emotion when hearing cases, though the standard account of judging long has denied that fact. In the post-Realist era it is possible to acknowledge that judges have emotional reactions to their work, yet our legal culture continues to insist that a good judge firmly puts those reactions aside. Thus, we expect judges to regulate their emotions, either by preventing emotion’s emergence or by walling off its influence. But judges are given precisely no direction as to how to engage in emotional regulation.

This Article proposes a model for judicial emotion regulation that goes beyond a blanket admonition to “put emotion aside.” While legal discourse on judicial emotion has been stunted, scientific study of the processes of emotion regulation has been robust. By bringing these literatures together for the first time, the Article reveals that our legal culture does nothing to promote intelligent judicial emotion regulation and much to discourage it.

An engagement model for managing judicial emotion promises to reverse this maladaptive pattern. It provides concrete tools with which judges may prepare realistically for emotional situations they necessarily will encounter, respond thoughtfully to emotions they cannot help but feel, and integrate lessons from such emotions into their behavior. Importantly, the medical community has begun to pursue just such a program to promote competent emotion regulation by doctors.

The engagement model is far superior to all its alternatives. Other regulation strategies, such as avoidance, are fundamentally incompatible with judges’ professional responsibilities. Suppressing the expression and experience of emotion—encouraged by the status quo—is costly and normatively undesirable. Suppression is unrealistic, exacerbates cognitive load, impairs memory, and can paradoxically increase emotion’s influence while rendering that influence less transparent. The judicial-engagement model, in contrast, leverages the best of what the psychology of emotion regulation has to offer. It puts a name to what extraordinary judges already are doing well and makes it available to all judges. By setting aside not judicial emotion but, rather, the crude manner in which we have asked judges to manage it, we stand materially to improve the quality of judging.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 72

Keywords: judges, emotion, psychology of judicial decision making

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 18, 2011 ; Last revised: April 27, 2012

Suggested Citation

Maroney, Terry A., Emotional Regulation and Judicial Behavior (April 26, 2012). California Law Review, Vol. 99, p.1481, 2011; Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 11-16. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1785616

Contact Information

Terry A. Maroney (Contact Author)
Vanderbilt University - Law School ( email )
131 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37203-1181
United States
615 343 3491 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,324
Downloads: 442
Download Rank: 35,254
Footnotes:  400
People who downloaded this paper also downloaded:
1. The Persistent Cultural Script of Judicial Dispassion
By Terry Maroney

Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.703 seconds